The GPL expressly states that the license does not restrict the act of"running the Program" in any way, and yes, in that sense you may "use" theprogram in whatever way you want.

But that "use" is clearly limited to running the resultant program. Itvery much does NOT say that you can "use the header files in any way youwant, including building non-GPL'd programs with them".

In fact, it very much says the reverse. If you use the source code tobuild a new program, the GPL _explicitly_ says that that new program hasto be GPL'd too.

> Please tell me how you use a kernel header file, other than by including> it in a code file, compiling that code file, and executing the result.

You are a weasel, and you are trying to make the world look the way youwant it to, rather than the way it _is_.

You use the word "use" in a sense that is not compatible with the GPL. Youclaim that the GPL says that you can "use the program any way you want",but that is simply not accurate or even _close_ to accurate. Go back andread the GPL again. It says:

"The act of running the Program is not restricted"

and it very much does NOT say

"The act of using parts of the source code of the Program is not restricted"

In short: you do _NOT_ have the right to use a kernel header file (or anyother part of the kernel sources), unless that use results in a GPL'dprogram.

What you _do_ have the right is to _run_ the kernel any way you please(this is the part you would like to redefine as "use the source code",but that definition simply isn't allowed by the license, however much youprotest to the contrary).

So you can run the kernel and create non-GPL'd programs while running itto your hearts content. You can use it to control a nuclear submarine, andthat's totally outside the scope of the license (but if you do, pleasenote that the license does not imply any kind of warranty or similar).

BUT YOU CAN NOT USE THE KERNEL HEADER FILES TO CREATE NON-GPL'D BINARIES.